Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I love how these 'moral arguments' are always framed - that we're supposed to take for granted that a moral philosophy derived from 'divine authority' is somehow ontologically and epistemologically robust. It isn't. It's utterly vacuous.
There is no reason to suspect any god exists.
Even if there were a god, there is no reason to suspect he necessarily has moral opinions at all.
Even if there were a god with moral opinions, there is no reason to suspect those moral opinions necessarily pertain to humanity.
Even if there were a god with moral opinions that pertain to humanity, there is no means of reliably gleaning what those opinions are.
So,
In a world where impossible to ascertain divine moral opinions don't exist, we are left having to discover morality on our own.
And,
In a world where impossible to ascertain divine moral opinions do exist, we are left having to discover morality on our own.
They are effectively identical.
But,
Even if there were a god with moral opinions that pertain to humanity and a means of reliably gleaning what those opinions are, there is no reason to necessarily conform to them. Some or all of them could just as easily be morally reprehensible, and we'd have to evaluate each one on its own merits.
So, again,
Even in a world where possible to ascertain divine moral opinions do exist, we are left having to discover morality on our own.
These are just of a few of the many, many problems with the 'moral argument' that theists must overcome before they can even pretend to possess a coherent moral philosophy, let alone any kind of moral high ground above me or any other nonbeliever.
I'm glad these aren't my problems.
Without God people are left to decide what is wrong or right. That sounds great to many people because they know what is wrong and right. Oddly, people seldom agree on this. Furthermore, when people gain power over others their view of right and wrong tends to change to right being whatever protects their power or grants them more power. ...
Christian morality resides in judgment, mercy, and faith, not a strict code of conduct.
Christian morality resides in judgment, mercy, and faith,
not a strict code of conduct.
So if God says an act is moral, you don't necessarily agree?
Judgement and mercy require no ontological basis in 'god' or any other supernaturalist non-concept.
'Faith' is worthless to morality, and all human concerns for that matter.
Interesting opinion.
In that case, describing any act as a 'sin' or any behavior as 'sinful' is nonsensical.
If one accepts your premise, which I don't.
Interesting opinion.
If one accepts your premise, which I don't.
Without God people are left to decide what is wrong or right.
...
For the rules to carry weight, so that you follow them even if you could break them and benefit without being caught or threatening the security and harmony of society, they have to be seen as sacred. Holy.
...
That's demonstrably wrong:
Atheists don't consider their morals as sacred or holy, yet they are not going against them.
If you don't consider your morals to be sacred, you will break them if given the opportunity to do so and both not get caught and not rock the boat in breaking them.
I have opportunity to break my morals without getting caught, and without rocking the boat (if we both mean the same thing by this), but I don't.
So you are demonstrably wrong.
Then your morals are either sacred or you are speaking untruths about what your behaviour would be if given the opportunity to break them...
How can you possibly know what I will or won't do, and what my reasoning is?
I don't know what you will or wont do.
I can only know that if your values are sacred you will keep them even if you have the opportunity to break them (and gain from the breaking whilst not getting caught and not threatening the secure social environment those morals provide).
And if they are not sacred....you will break them if you can get away with it.
As I stated, I am proof that you are incorrect.
Or do you claim that you can read my mind?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?